Cam Newton cleared??

[CougarClaw]

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=5870788" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Interesting. Cam's dad sends a request for a payment to go play for Miss State. NCAA finds out.
Cam tells a Miss St recruiter that the "money is too much" and has to go to Auburn.

NCAA finds that Cam did nothing wrong since it was his Dad (despite apparently knowing about it and agreeing to it isn't against the NCAA rules)

but what I find really strange is there is an implied amount paid by Auburn for his services, and no sanctions. Also implied involvement by Miss State, no sanctions. Is this getting swept under the rug?

[Lawboy]

Reggie Bush just lost his Heisman becuase his parents got a house--not reggie. So the fact family benefitted and not the player is not hte issue. whether the player knows or not is not the issue. It is if a payment is made.

This is temporary. It will blow up after 2010, then Auburn gets tripped, the SEC still got their money, and they are happy.

[snoscythe]

Reggie Bush just lost his Heisman becuase his parents got a house--not reggie. So the fact family benefitted and not the player is not hte issue. whether the player knows or not is not the issue. It is if a payment is made.

This is temporary. It will blow up after 2010, then Auburn gets tripped, the SEC still got their money, and they are happy.

Reggie Bush didn't lose his Heisman. He gave it up.

[SpiffCoug]

Don't forget that Auburn earlier this week declared in INeligible and then the NCAA came in and said he wasn't. I wonder if the SEC made a phone call.

[CAFB_04-12]

Reggie Bush just lost his Heisman becuase his parents got a house--not reggie. So the fact family benefitted and not the player is not hte issue. whether the player knows or not is not the issue. It is if a payment is made.

This is temporary. It will blow up after 2010, then Auburn gets tripped, the SEC still got their money, and they are happy.

Reggie Bush didn't lose his Heisman. He gave it up.

...so that the committee wouldn't have the chance to take it (which they were likely going to do).

[snoscythe]

Reggie Bush just lost his Heisman becuase his parents got a house--not reggie. So the fact family benefitted and not the player is not hte issue. whether the player knows or not is not the issue. It is if a payment is made.

This is temporary. It will blow up after 2010, then Auburn gets tripped, the SEC still got their money, and they are happy.

Reggie Bush didn't lose his Heisman. He gave it up.

...so that the committee wouldn't have the chance to take it (which they were likely going to do).

The committee had already announced that they weren't going to do anything about it.

[ABYUFAN]

Reggie Bush just lost his Heisman becuase his parents got a house--not reggie. So the fact family benefitted and not the player is not hte issue. whether the player knows or not is not the issue. It is if a payment is made.

This is temporary. It will blow up after 2010, then Auburn gets tripped, the SEC still got their money, and they are happy.

Reggie Bush didn't lose his Heisman. He gave it up.

...so that the committee wouldn't have the chance to take it (which they were likely going to do).

The committee had already announced that they weren't going to do anything about it.

I remember it differently...

http://ncaafootball.fanhouse.com/2010/0 ... an-trophy/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The Heisman Trophy Trust reportedly was prepared to meet Tuesday to vote whether to strip Bush of the award. Last month, USC returned its copy of the trophy after the NCAA smacked the program with a two-year bowl ban and massive scholarship cuts, finding Bush had accepted illegal benefits during the '04-05 seasons.

[snoscythe]

Reggie Bush just lost his Heisman becuase his parents got a house--not reggie. So the fact family benefitted and not the player is not hte issue. whether the player knows or not is not the issue. It is if a payment is made.

This is temporary. It will blow up after 2010, then Auburn gets tripped, the SEC still got their money, and they are happy.

Reggie Bush didn't lose his Heisman. He gave it up.

...so that the committee wouldn't have the chance to take it (which they were likely going to do).

The committee had already announced that they weren't going to do anything about it.

I remember it differently...

http://ncaafootball.fanhouse.com/2010/0 ... an-trophy/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The Heisman Trophy Trust reportedly was prepared to meet Tuesday to vote whether to strip Bush of the award. Last month, USC returned its copy of the trophy after the NCAA smacked the program with a two-year bowl ban and massive scholarship cuts, finding Bush had accepted illegal benefits during the '04-05 seasons.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d8 ... shs-trophy" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Heisman Trophy Trust executive director Rob Whalen denied a report that his organization has decided to take away the 2005 trophy from New Orleans Saints running back Reggie Bush, who was implicated in an NCAA investigation of USC's football program.

"Yahoo Sports claiming Heisman Trust has reached a decision is completely false," Whalen told nationally syndicated radio program "The Dan Patrick Show" on Tuesday. "The Heisman Trophy Trust has made no decision regarding the Reggie Bush matter."

Again, either way, whether the Trust was going to take it away or not (at best all you could say is they were supposed to vote on whether or not to take it away)--the fact is, they didn't take it away. Bush gave it up. Your story confirms my statement--he didn't lose it, he gave it up.

[BigCougsFan]

Hey All this is gay Soon these boys will pay Not at night, but at day I'm all out, so what do you say?

[ABYUFAN]

Again, either way, whether the Trust was going to take it away or not (at best all you could say is they were supposed to vote on whether or not to take it away)--the fact is, they didn't take it away. Bush gave it up. Your story confirms my statement--he didn't lose it, he gave it up.

I agree that he gave it up, and in rereading my post I should have been more clear on what I was disagreeing about. Not that he didn't give it up, only that the Trust had already decided not to take it away from him. Sorry about the confusion.